TY - JOUR
T1 - Organic farmer perceptions of reduced tillage
T2 - A Michigan farmer survey
AU - Lowry, Carolyn J.
AU - Brainard, Daniel C.
N1 - Funding Information:
This project was supported by funding from two Michigan State University awards: the University Distinguished Fellowship and Ecological Food and Farming Specialization Fellowship. We greatly appreciate all of the Michigan organic farmers that took the time to complete and return our survey. We are also grateful to Vicki Morrone, Erin Haramoto, Jeremy Moghtader, Dan Filius, Vicki Zilke, and the organic farmer participants in our pilot survey, for their insightful comments and feedback in developing the survey instrument. Finally, we thank John Kerr, Mathieu Ngouajio, Alexandra Kravchenko, and G. Phil Robertson for guidance, as well as three anonymous reviewers for comments on the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Cambridge University Press.
PY - 2019/4/1
Y1 - 2019/4/1
N2 - A common critique of organic farming is that it is very tillage intensive, and therefore deleterious to soil quality. However, little information is available on the tillage practices currently employed by organic farmers, as well as organic farmers' attitudes toward reduced tillage (RT). To address these knowledge gaps, a detailed written survey of Michigan organic field crop and vegetable farmers was conducted to investigate their current tillage practices, as well as their perceptions of the barriers and benefits to adoption of RT. Respondents reported a wide range in tillage frequency and intensity, both across and within production of specific crops, with operations split evenly between field preparation and cultivation. Compared with field crop growers, vegetable growers were generally smaller scale and relied more heavily on a limited set of tillage (e.g., rototiller) and cultivation tools. Interest in adoption of RT practices among respondents was low to moderate with median Likert scale ratings (0-7 scale with 0 representing no interest and 7 extreme interest) of 4 or less for all forms of RT. Vegetable growers were most interested in permanent beds, rotational tillage and strip tillage, whereas field crop growers were most interested in rotational tillage and strip tillage. The greatest perceived benefits to adoption of RT were improved soil quality and fuel savings. Both groups ranked weeds, impacts on yields, residue management and crop establishment as high barriers to RT adoption. Vegetable growers also cited lack of scale appropriate equipment as a major barrier. Survey results suggest that future research efforts should focus on overcoming key barriers to adoption, such as weed management and access to low-cost adaptable RT equipment rather than reiterating relatively well-known soil quality benefits. Our results also suggest that promotion of incremental reductions in the frequency and intensity of tillage operations on organic farms may be more realistic and equally valuable compared with promotion of more extreme forms of RT such as no-till.
AB - A common critique of organic farming is that it is very tillage intensive, and therefore deleterious to soil quality. However, little information is available on the tillage practices currently employed by organic farmers, as well as organic farmers' attitudes toward reduced tillage (RT). To address these knowledge gaps, a detailed written survey of Michigan organic field crop and vegetable farmers was conducted to investigate their current tillage practices, as well as their perceptions of the barriers and benefits to adoption of RT. Respondents reported a wide range in tillage frequency and intensity, both across and within production of specific crops, with operations split evenly between field preparation and cultivation. Compared with field crop growers, vegetable growers were generally smaller scale and relied more heavily on a limited set of tillage (e.g., rototiller) and cultivation tools. Interest in adoption of RT practices among respondents was low to moderate with median Likert scale ratings (0-7 scale with 0 representing no interest and 7 extreme interest) of 4 or less for all forms of RT. Vegetable growers were most interested in permanent beds, rotational tillage and strip tillage, whereas field crop growers were most interested in rotational tillage and strip tillage. The greatest perceived benefits to adoption of RT were improved soil quality and fuel savings. Both groups ranked weeds, impacts on yields, residue management and crop establishment as high barriers to RT adoption. Vegetable growers also cited lack of scale appropriate equipment as a major barrier. Survey results suggest that future research efforts should focus on overcoming key barriers to adoption, such as weed management and access to low-cost adaptable RT equipment rather than reiterating relatively well-known soil quality benefits. Our results also suggest that promotion of incremental reductions in the frequency and intensity of tillage operations on organic farms may be more realistic and equally valuable compared with promotion of more extreme forms of RT such as no-till.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85023193642&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85023193642&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/S1742170517000357
DO - 10.1017/S1742170517000357
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85023193642
SN - 1742-1705
VL - 34
SP - 103
EP - 115
JO - Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems
JF - Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems
IS - 2
ER -